Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I ask leave to move a motion relating to the conduct of the business of the Senate, namely a motion to give precedence to general business order of the day No. 52 for private senators' bills relating to the Defence Force Amendment (Fair Pay for Members of the ADF) Bill 2014.

Leave not granted.

Pursuant to contingent notice, I move:

That so much of the standing orders be suspended as would prevent Senator Lambie moving a motion relating to the conduct of business of the Senate, namely a motion to give precedence to general business order of the day No. 52 for private senators' bills relating to the Defence Force Amendment (Fair Pay for Members of the ADF) Bill 2014.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The government does not support the suspension of standing orders. We are now in the last two days of the parliamentary sitting. There is an orderly agenda before us and I simply put to senators that if we are going to have, yet again, another hijacking of the agenda in this the last week as a result of various coalitions of convenience across the chamber, I think we are doing ourselves a disservice in the management of not only this place but also the agenda and the matters the Australian people wish us to deal with.

Let us not fabricate any difference in this place about who cares for the welfare of the Australian Defence Force. We all do. As a cabinet minister I live with that responsibility every day, as does the Prime Minister and as does the Minister for Defence. I trust we all live with that responsibility.

The reality is, in relation to Defence pay, that Australia is burdened with an interest bill of $1,000 million a month, and that is being borrowed simply to pay the interest on the debt that has already been sustained. All spending has to be sustainable, even Defence spending. It is just not feasible to borrow even more money to pay for higher wages. The government needs to find an additional $16,000 million just to replace that which Labor stripped out of Defence during their six years in government.

In answer to a question earlier this week, I indicated what the CPI increases were and what the actual wage increases were for the Public Service, and over the last decade there was a differential of 14 per cent—the wage increases being 42 per cent and CPI 28 per cent. In relation to the ADF, just on wages the differential is some 10 per cent, and that does not take into account the, in general terms, quite generous allowances that do come with Defence Force service.

I also say to honourable senators who might be attracted to this proposition that the Remuneration Tribunal itself has said that it has a long-held view that setting remuneration for one office by reference to another office does not lead to defensible or meaningful wage outcomes. If we want to start setting wages in this place, we can get rid of the Fair Work Commission, get rid of the Remuneration Tribunal and get rid of the Defence Force Remuneration Tribunal.

Doug Cameron (NSW, Australian Labor Party, Shadow Minister for Human Services) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You're trying to get rid of it anyway!

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my left!

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

We get a churlish, silly interjection, as we always expect, from Senator Cameron, but does he actually want the parliament to set wages? That is the issue—and now he falls silent. Of course he does not want to. If we do not want the parliament to set wages, then we should not come rushing in here with populist agendas to try to get wage increases. It is interesting that in this bill we do not have the reverse—that parliamentary salaries should, as a matter of fact, be linked to CPI. The financial situation in this country, regrettably, meant that I was duty-bound on behalf of the government to go to the Remuneration Tribunal and say that parliamentarians, secretaries, the Chief of the Defence Force and the Minister for Defence must all have any wage increases that were to come to them frozen and, for this coming year, set at zero. Why did we do that? Because the money simply is not there. When we seek to make more generous payments to anyone in Australia, that money first has to come out of the pocket of one of our fellow Australians.

In summary, there is an agenda that needs to be dealt with here. We do not want the parliament setting people's wages when there are remuneration tribunals and other tribunals designed to do that. I invite senators to oppose the motion. (Time expired)

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I seek leave to speak on the motion.

Leave not granted.

Penny Wong (SA, Australian Labor Party, Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Mr President, I seek leave to make a one-minute statement.

Leave granted.

I would ask the government to reconsider the courtesy. The senator thought she would be called again after the motion was moved. It was a genuine mistake. Regardless of what people's views are about the merits of the motion, it is Senator Lambie's motion and I would invite the government to extend a little courtesy to allow the senator to speak on the motion she has moved. It would be very churlish not to, I would suggest.

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a one-minute statement.

Leave granted.

Mr President, regrettably, Senator Lambie's former party has form in this place of moving procedural and other motions and not speaking to them by design. That is what we thought Senator Lambie was doing yet again, and now Senator Wong sees a genuine mistake without even having spoken to Senator Lambie. So here we are, having the opposition championing on the cause of Senator Lambie. Senator Lambie has now been in this place for a number of months and should be aware of the procedures. If Senator Lambie did not know that she should have spoken to her motion when she moved it, so be it. Let her acknowledge that. As the government we would be prepared to extend the courtesy to her.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I seek leave to make a short statement for a minute to explain.

Leave granted.

I have to say that I thought I would get a chance to speak on this, but obviously Senator Abetz has jumped straight up—there is no doubt about that. Out of common courtesy—

Eric Abetz (Tasmania, Liberal Party, Minister for Employment) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

You sat down.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Order on my right. Senator Lambie has a right to speak. Order on my left as well. Senator Cameron. Senator Conroy.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I do not apologise to Senator Abetz. I doubt that in his first 5½ months he put up a bill. I do not have a big party behind me and so I do not have that impact. I am asking you to give me a fair go and show me some courtesy over this and let me speak for five minutes. More importantly, this is not about me; this is about the men and women who wear the uniform. You know it and I know it. The reason you do not want me to speak is that you are blocking the remuneration package of $121 million that these men and women are looking for. You have a part in taking away this money away from them. Not allowing me five minutes on the floor is all over—over the ego of your own party and yourself.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Before I move to anyone else, I want to clarify what exactly has happened in this chamber. Senator Lambie sought the call, and leave was denied. Then Senator Lambie, and it is her right, moved a motion to suspend standing orders. I particularly noted Senator Lambie sitting down; I paused; then Senator Abetz rose to his feet and he spoke. In fact, I started to call the question, thinking no-one was going to speak. That is exactly what happened and let us not have a different portrayal of events. Everyone has legitimately sought the call and been given the call at the appropriate time. Now we have the situation where leave, I understand, has now been granted for Senator Lambie to speak for five minutes, because Senator Lambie has indicated that she inadvertently made a mistake. Senator Lambie, you have the call.

Jacqui Lambie (Tasmania, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The Defence Amendment (Fair Pay for Members of the ADF) Bill 2014 is a critical and important piece of legislation, which deserves precedence and priority to the other general business of this Senate. As the title of the bill indicates, if this legislation is passed by this parliament, it will guarantee that the men and women of our Defence Force receive a fair pay rise, rather than an effective pay cut in the near future—perhaps before Christmas.

Apart from Liberal and National Party members, who have wrong-headed priorities and twisted loyalties to political parties and who have not fought hard enough in their party rooms for their ADF families, who would want to stop this parliament from immediately debating and passing legislation that provides a solution to the ADF pay crisis, created by Australia's Prime Minister and Defence Minister? What debate could be more important than a debate that fundamentally affects the national security of Australia? If we do not have national security, then we do not have anything.

As the Senate, we daily choose to debate to pass or not legislation which affects education, health, social security, TPV, RETs, the sky-rocketing costs of electricity and fuel and the Tasmanian Freight Equalisation Scheme. But if our nation is not properly secure and our Defence Force has been weakened, either by incompetence or by design, then the best health, education, social security systems in the world will ultimately be off little value to the nation.

Ordinary Tasmanians and Australians 100 per cent support the men and women of our Defence Forces 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. That is unlike some in this chamber, who by their actions or lack of actions and their silence and cowardly behaviour in their party rooms choose to live off the Anzac legend rather than live up to the Anzac legend.

I am looking forward to hearing every word, every syllable and every sentence of those members of this Senate who choose to deny this chamber a debate this morning on the fair pay of members of the Australian Defence Forces, with the help of a magnificent Hansard team, who skilfully record our words for Australia's history. I will make sure that every full-time member of our Army, Navy and RAAF, approximately 57,000 souls; all of their families and friends; the 20,000 reservists and all their family and friends; and every one of our 200,000 veterans out there and their all of their families and friends—all of those Australians, hundreds of thousands, perhaps even millions—will get an opportunity to read or hear the poor excuses of those in this Senate who oppose a debate about a fair pay deal for our diggers this morning.

The facts before this chamber are clear. Earlier this week, I meet with Mr Tony Dagger. He is the father of a serving Australian Defence Force member. Mr Dagger presented me, the opposition leader and other members of this parliament with a petition containing almost 60,000 signatures calling on this government to fix the Australian Defence Force pay injustice. Apart from Mr Dagger and his petition supporters, the hundreds and thousands of phone calls and emails to my office and to other senators offices prove why we should have this debate right now.

Importantly, the hundreds of troops serving overseas, who are in harm's way for our benefit and who have been absolutely gutted by this government's and this Prime Minister's decision to take away $17 million of leave and entitlements and then give back the $17 million, are still facing a future with an effective pay cut. Those Australian Defence Force members and their families would like to hear the news of a debate on the Defence Amendment (Fair Pay for Members of the ADF) Bill 2014 today—not a day later and not an hour later. Right now, this government and their members must explain to Australian people why they cannot afford to invest an extra $121 million dollars a year—that is it—into the pay of the men and women of our Defence Force.

The time has now come for the senators in this chamber to live up to the Anzac legend and not off it.

Stephen Conroy (Victoria, Australian Labor Party, Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I indicate on behalf of Labor that we will be supporting the suspension of standing orders. Let's be clear: this would not be happening if the government had done the right thing by our service men and women and this would not be happening if the government had not cut the pay and conditions of Australian Defence Force personnel—that is right, of the men and women we ask to sacrifice everything. They are being asked to pay that price by this mean government and a mean, out of touch Prime Minister who is refusing to pay them properly. It is quite simply outrageous.

Not only that, they are treating those who support better pay for ADF personnel with contempt. I had the honour on Monday to meet Tony Dagger, a father who has a son in the ADF. He started an online petition on Change.org. I urge everybody listening to sign it. In a little over four weeks, this petition has been signed by more than 60,000 people. It is remarkable achievement and a clear indication of the community outrage at the government's decision to cut the ADF's pay and conditions. Did the government accept this petition with good grace? Did the government respect the work and efforts of Tony and his supporters? It may not surprise anyone, but the government did not.

Let me read from the Change.org website, which outlines their experience on Monday of this week when meeting the Assistant Minister for Defence, the minister who talks publicly of how he is running the department. This is what they said on their website:

We (our ADF) are being compared to beer and Asprin.

That is right: the Assistant Minister for Defence was so dismissive of this petition that he said it was not as big as others, in support of beer and aspirin. That was the contempt with which he treated parents of our serving personnel. Quite rightly, they felt insulted and that it was disgraceful. Quite rightly, the petition organisers say that the government is arrogant, ill informed and self-centred. That is the view of the parents of serving personnel after meeting the Assistant Minister for Defence. I repeat this warning to the government that they gave:

We will not go away, and we will be heard.

The Government will ignore us at their peril.

Standing orders should be suspended so we can debate this bill. We hear the community outrage. We hear the concerns coming to us from the ADF and their families. The government had the chance to do the right thing, and they chose to do the wrong thing. Standing orders should be suspended.

Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The comment just now was from a man who does not even respect the uniform of our defence forces. The people of Australia should know that the opposition's spokesman on defence disrespects the uniform that our servicemen wear.

This is a difficult matter. The Labor Party, in determining these things, should remember that they actually had pay increases for the defence forces less than CPI on two occasions. They cut money out of the Defence Force budget. These matters should be known to those who might be listening to the debate. These matters should be known to Senator Lambie, who has been played by the Labor Party like, as my colleague said, an accordion.

These are difficult issues. I am delighted that the government has returned the leave entitlements that the Remuneration Tribunal took away. I congratulate my colleagues who represent the electorates where the defence forces are most prominent. They, and I as a senator based in the garrison city of Townsville, understand these issues. We also understand the $1 billion a month that the Labor Party's debt is costing Australians—$1 billion a month in borrowed money to pay off the interest on the debt that Labor ran up.

These are difficult situations. I know Senator Johnston and the Prime Minister are addressing the issues. It is important that we actually allow these processes to take place. We should proceed today with the agenda that has been set out for the parliament and which was agreed upon, I understand, by all parties. This interruption will not go anywhere. We should stick by the agenda that has been placed before the parliament for the last two days of this sittings.

I will not delay the Senate any further. I conclude by again reminding anyone who might be following this debate that Labor, on two occasions, had a Defence pay increase that was less than CPI. Where was Senator Lambie then? Where was she then? It did not seem to worry her then. Where was Senator Lambie when Senator Stephen Conroy, the opposition spokesman on defence, insulted a distinguished senior serving officer of our defence forces? Where was Senator Lambie then? This is, again, the sheer hypocrisy of the Labor Party when it comes to defence issues. We should not agree to delay the agenda of the parliament.

John Madigan (Victoria, Independent) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

Whilst I support Senator Lambie's obvious passion for the Defence Force and the issue of pay for the Defence Force—and the men and women who don the uniform in defence of this country should be supported—I also recognise that this place is a house of review. To function properly, it must adhere to the highest principles of democracy, integrity and respect. I therefore do not support Senator Lambie's suspension of standing orders because I do not believe it is the correct procedure in which to bring this to the Senate. I will not be part of this as I believe this debate deserves far more respect in this place.

Stephen Parry (President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

The question is that the motion moved by Senator Lambie to suspend standing orders be agreed to.